. >> suarez: special correspondent john tulenko reports on community colleges rethinking remedial classes and trying new approaches to help the least prepared students succeed. >> they're coming here with a great emphasis on making their lives better. the first thing we say to them is "not so fast there. you're not really in college, you can't take college-level courses, you've got to take these developmental courses." >> brown: we update the north carolina eugenics story as state lawmakers pass a budget without the compensation promised to victims of forced sterilization. >> suarez: from the west african nation of niger, we examine a once-in-a-generation famine threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands of children. >> every child here is at serious risk of dying. for each bed there is a skeletal frame. >> brown: and the euro-zone crisis comes to the soccer field as greece meets germany in the euro championship quarterfinals. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: >> this is the at&t network-- a living, breathing intelligence

. -- reim mediated -- remediated. and golden gate heights.ervisor elsbernd: there is christopher but that falls under another category. >> christopher is pressure treated lumber. that falls under another site. and here -- this map shows the spread of potentially -- playgrounds that are on the worst side of condition across the city. you can see that is spread or isolated to a neighborhood or district. we have the structures across the city so these funds would be eligible toward repeating -- remediating those playgrounds. this is another element. constituents and staff have had the frustrating experience of watching us water a sidewalk. this is a very small step in the right direction. we do feel like with the $5 million we should be able to address some of our highest water using parks and make them less water intensive and that includes parks like alamo square and plaza and even parts of moscone where we have seen a lot of water loss. we plan on using these funds [unintelligible] we have been successful in the past in obtaining puc funds to

they get this number and go into remedial course and they sit there. they're not sure every day is this the part that i understand or is this the part that i completely messed up. 70% of those kids that go to that math class never get a degree. it's bad in every way. the ideal is to have the set of knowledge we expect you to have in math say algebra to have that be well understood. there's the so-called common core effort that's been adopted by 46 states that will lead to that. you can have different textbooks and different ways of teaching the but the core concept is the same. the online material that has adopted to this common core very quickly over the period of the next few years, the different states are getting their textbooks and teacher training into that. that will be coupled with these free online exams that you can try your knowledge out and be pointed to various material that will help you glet. we hope to take this disconnect to make it kind of clean up these problems and have it be a lot more open about what's going on and a lot more effi

these remedies can only help adjudicated conduct. so much of what happens on the ground is adjudicated. if it doesn't get to a point of law. we need to have a multifaceted approach and we need more transparence ney police departments and that will go a long way to solving some of the problems that the communities have with trust and legitimacy. so i want to talk about the united states department of justice and their pattern of practice authority. the united states department of justice has the authority to sue and seek injunctive relief against police departments that are engaging in patterns of unconstitutional behavior of which racial profiling is one of many things that police departments could be doing and so one of these and doj has used this authority in washington, d.c., pittsburgh, los angeles and a lot of the reforms that have been gained through this were the forms that the department is seeking to gain an early warning tracking system. so if there is one thing that we know about police agencies is that when there's a prob

if the department of justice doesn't want to use existing remedies, it should explain why it hasn't used them to date. >> the bill would prohibit claims that a candidate or party has endorsed a candidate that it has not. could you explain first amendment problems with that prohibition? >> a claim that someone has endorsed a candidate is not always easy to determine whether that's in fact true. endorsements are sometimes subtle. can you endorse by presence at a campaign event? and can you claim the support of someone with whom you have spoken privately? the bill would give somebody a tool to to file suit and say you are not in fact endorsed by that other person whose support you claim. and you're entitled to make truthful statements and you would have to defend the truthfulness of the statement that you made. >> one of the witnesses today favors this bill because it effects only unprotected speech and would prohibit the dispersal of arguable fraudulent speech. is arguable fraudulent speech, unprotected speech under the first amendment? >> i don't think so. i don't think that -- one of the

to be told the remedy is to get two-thirds of both houses is not much of a remedy at all. reigns v bird, senator bird objected to temperature's line item veto. the court said denied standing, we're not going to hear it, wait for and actual instance of somebody who didn't get a benefit as a result. regal versus federal open market committee, senator regal said the federal reserve open market committee is deciding monetary policy. and half of the members haven't been confirmed. i as a senator had my rights cut off. no, said the court, you don't have to stand. time and time again when it was an issue of the assertion of legislative prerogative against executive prerogative, the court has denied standing. that makes the u.s. versus nixon case so very fascinating because it went the other way. my last case to cite in making this argument is i.n.s. versus chadha where the supreme court struck down an attempt by congress to hold back delegated power to the president by the one house veto. students of this case i'm sure will remember that there was no case or controversy. the pres

to remedy these problems, our objective should be to level the playing field and restore trust in the ipo process by maximizing transparency and useful disclosure. there are three recommendations. first, extend the application and enforcement of regulation fair disclosure to the beginning of the ipo process. this will help to improve the flow of information to all investors and reduce one of the most preventful information asymmetries between underwriters and their favorite clients versus ordinary investors. second, require the companies and underwriters allocate shares to the initial offering in a more inclusive and efficient manner. companies like google, morning star and interactive brokers have successfully employed variations on a dutch auction process which give all investors the opportunity to participate in buying shares at the same price, under an equitable plan of distribution. an added benefit is that it lowers the cost of going public for companies by more than half. finally, fix the most troubling portions of the jobs act from the retailer's perspective. while there are a

what you need to do is find out what your rights are, and if you need to make repairs or remediations, do it because you are going to have to do it sometime during the course of litigation if there is a problem with access to your premises, so long as the renovations are readily achievable. if it does not so much cost that it is so excess of for the amount of revenue being generated for your business, you have to make -- the way to look at it is let's say it takes $50,000 to renovate or remedy a the property for business. if your business is generating $100,000 a year in revenues, you clearly are not going to come up with $50,000 to make the changes, at least not in year one. but some of it you can do in year one. that percentage is not in a fixed amount. that usually gets 15% of your gross revenues could be assessed as being available to you to make these repairs. they will aggregate that over time, so if you cannot make all your repairs in year one, you can make some, but it may take you three or four years before you have to make the changes, but there is no defense to making the c

for that individual, we have to have certain types of remedies. for that individual, we have to have consequences. however, it does not mean that we have to enforce his prison sentence to the maximum of the law. we have a step program, which increases the amount of time you can go to a prison ford -- prison. for a home invasion, or a carjacking, or shooting into a car or house, you cannot 15 to life. for a regular felony, you can add five years. for that individual, we do not always seek to add that extra 10 years. we hope that person realizes, you almost spend the rest of your life in prison. it is up to you to see what you were going to do with that. and then we have the third group. they're committing the most violent crimes. the individuals that come together as a force, they are enforcing their will on a community in the bayview, western addition, the mission. those individuals are dressed in a different way. -- addressed in a different way. we will do an indictment. the fed will do the same thing, they will indict maybe 15, 20 dain members.

the primary problem is one of addiction and treatment of remediation of that and the subsequent behavioral problems and other things is probably far more cost-effective and good for that person than simply sentencing them to prison time. and so i think the neuroscience helps to educate and change our ways that we understand drugs and drug addiction. >> another question is have you ever been allowed to testify regarding i.q. in a hearing or a trial using your program? >> yes, i just did that this weekend. so i testified this morning. i do know that -- so the atkins case was actually argued by a professor at the university of new mexico and he is constantly barraged by what's the best way to assess i.q., especially when you have these different tests and different measures, et cetera. i.q. is one of the most well studied things in psychology. so taking a brain scan and fitting your brain along a dimension and getting a value is just a slightly different way of doing it than giving you the tests and stuff like that. so i have not obviously testified to anything like that. i just tried to give

once it has completed the process, there is no further remedy for the agency. once there has been a referral to the city attorney's office, the client bills for services and will generally investigate the underlying allegations and appropriate mitigation. some matters may resolve short of litigation. i would like to say over the course of the last five years, this has been an incredibly important program for generating city revenue, while reflecting the policy priority of the board of supervisors to make sure that we are reaching out on behalf of the citizens of the city of san francisco. more specifically, in the period of 2007 to 2012, the city attorney's office has negotiated judgments of parts of $12 million. the amounts collected on those judgments is approximately $8 million. the cost of litigating is $4 million. so, it was a worthwhile investment on behalf of the residents of the city and county of san francisco and we are happy with our efforts. the code enforcement program generates revenue consistent with future code enforcement efforts. however, mone

the things that would not be counted for peer you can help to remedy the problem and get help, so that your liability at the end of the day is a very small one, hopefully. we know we will be heard from from our experts on a legal side. a lot of them can really add up here this gentleman again had heard about a situation where someone had already racked up $40,000 with of legal fees. became an issue. we are not talking about what it costs to fix up which in itself would be excess of, but also the legal component. your word of mouth and the people you know will really help. and, of course, to our media folks, people will read your articles and understand that they can really do a lot to protect their businesses early on. >> i just want to add one comment about getting our association involved. we put together a really great training. we have a panel available to you. it is only going to cost you $35 for a 30-minute conversation, and that might be the best $35 you have already spent to avoid something that will be happening in the future. that is just part of the collaborative process wit

the three% commitment will begin to remedy these devastating reductions. there is a daily reduction in new hires from 60 to 70 people each year to only 20, and no raises for staff. we are pleased to be the provider of networks and advocates. i hope you will consider proposals such as investment of the $250,000 for family violence prevention, as recommended by supervisor avalos. funding for housing. there are only 22 beds specifically for lgbt youth. the closing of the $50,000 funding gap for the family collaborative for our community partners, our family coalition, and the sf lgbt center. the additional $500,000 for the mayor so that youth will not be excluded from the city remedy. finally, i asked you to champion workforce development for our most marginalized young people. this has been devastating to marginalized low-income youth in our community. >> my name is barbara. i want to thank the supervisors for allowing everybody to speak. i want to thank supervisors avalos and kim for wanting to stop wasteful spending associated with the sharp park golf cour

i believe it is for remedial supplemental instruction and it is for an amount of $1,250,000. it does not have details on what is being flexed from that resource code. thank you. >> thank you. >> go ahead. would you like to -- >> most of the resources that you pointed out are in the sup meantry sheet that i -- supmentry sheet that i handed out that indicates the expenditure. this sheet here tells you what you the total fundings from the state is for these particular programs and these details are the expenditures that co-relate to that. in addition to this, in the budget book that is in exhibit 6 a, that also gives you revenue along with the expenditure and the amount that is to be flexed. some of the other programs like the supplemental remedial instruction programs and the grade 9 math class size reduction program have traditionally all been always been unrestricted and are included in exhibit four, i believe, in as district revenue and those programs are used for the purposes for which they were originally intended. >> it is a lot more confusing than it was in previous year